Obama orders flags lowered to honor U.S. diplomats


Release from the White House:

For Immediate Release
September 12, 2012

Presidential Proclamation — Honoring the Victims of the Attack in Benghazi, Libya

HONORING THE VICTIMS OF THE ATTACK IN BENGHAZI, LIBYA

- – – – – – -

BY THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

A PROCLAMATION

As a mark of respect for the memory of John Christopher Stevens, United States Ambassador to Libya, and American personnel killed in the senseless attack on our diplomatic facility in Benghazi, by the authority vested in me as President of the United States by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, I hereby order that the flag of the United States shall be flown at half-staff at the White House and upon all public buildings and grounds, at all military posts and naval stations, and on all naval vessels of the Federal Government in the District of Columbia and throughout the United States and its Territories and possessions until sunset, September 16, 2012. I also direct that the flag shall be flown at half-staff for the same length of time at all United States embassies, legations, consular offices, and other facilities abroad, including all military facilities and naval vessels and stations.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this twelfth day of September, in the year of our Lord two thousand twelve, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-seventh.

BARACK OBAMA

About these ads

9 Responses to Obama orders flags lowered to honor U.S. diplomats

  1. JamesK says:

    And of course David will ignore this: http://www.denverpost.com/nationworld/ci_21604307/30-000-protest-militias-benghazi-libya-burn-militants

    BENGHAZI, libya — Hundreds of protesters seized control of several militia headquarters Friday night, including the compound of one of Libya’s strongest armed Islamic extremist groups, evicting militiamen and setting fire to buildings as the attack that killed a U.S. ambassador and three other Americans sparked a backlash against armed groups.

    Men at the administrative center for the Ansar al-Shariah militia, suspected to have led the Sept. 11 attack on the U.S. Consulate, fired in the air to disperse the crowd but eventually withdrew from the site with their weapons and vehicles. The protesters handed the seized compounds over to Libya’s national army.

    “I don’t want to see armed men wearing Afghani-style clothes

    stopping me in the street to give me orders, I only want to see people in uniform,” said Omar Mohammed, a university student who took part in the takeover, which protesters said was done in support of the army and police.

    No deaths were reported in incidents, which came after tens of thousands marched in Benghazi in a rally against armed militias. A vehicle was also burned at one compound.

    For many Libyans, last week’s attack on the U.S. Consulate in the eastern city of Benghazi was the last straw with one of the biggest problems Libya has faced since Moammar Khadafy’s ouster and death around a year ago — the multiple mini-armies that with their arsenals of machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades are stronger than the regular armed forces and police.

    The militias, a legacy of the rag-tag popular forces that fought Khadafy’s regime, tout themselves as protectors of Libya’s revolution, providing security where police cannot. But many say they act like gangs, detaining and intimidating rivals and carrying out killings.

    Militias made up of Islamic radicals are notorious for attacks on Muslims who don’t abide by their hardline ideology. Officials and witnesses say fighters from Ansar al-Shariah led the attack on the U.S. Consulate.

    About 30,000 people filled a broad boulevard as they marched along a lake in central Benghazi on Friday to the gates of the headquarters of Ansar al-Shariah.

    “No, no, to militias,” the crowd chanted, filling a broad boulevard. They carried banners and signs demanding that militias disband and that the government build up police to take their place in keeping security. “Benghazi is in a trap,” signs read. “Where is the army, where is the police?”

    Other signs mourned the killing of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens, reading, “The ambassador was Libya’s friend” and “Libya lost a friend.” Military helicopters and fighter jets flew overhead, and police mingled in the crowd, buoyed by the support of the protesters.

    The march was the biggest seen in Benghazi, Libya’s second largest city and home to 1 million people, since the fall of Khadafy in August 2011. The unprecedented public backlash comes in part in frustration with the interim government, which has been unable to rein in the armed factions.

    And of course David will continue to ignore the fact that Obama hasn’t apologized to the Middle East and hasn’t sympathized with the attackers.

    Why? Because David isn’t interested in being honest. He just wants to weaken the United States by putting the serial flip-flopper..the most wishy washy of men into the White House..that being Mitt Romney.

    How can you trust that Mitt Romney will stand up to our enemies when he doesn’t even stand up for his own supposed convictions?

    Like

  2. [...] Obama orders flags lowered to honor U.S. diplomats  For Immediate Release [...]

    Like

  3. JamesK says:

    To quote:
    You do know that Obama just did Vegas after an American ambassador was dragged through the streets

    And where was Bush right after 9-11? And Hurricane Katrina?

    And what did Mittens do when an ambassador of ours was killed?

    Yeah once again you don’t hold the moral high ground here. Because you live in a fantasy world because you’re oh so cared of the scary black man in the White House so you blithely ignore the history of your own party and its actions.

    Like

  4. Ed Darrell says:

    You do know that Obama just did Vegas after an American ambassador was dragged through the streets. ( Ok, the dead ambassador, was being taken to hospital , but stopped for some cell phone pictures) Then Obama did Letterman…and a hip hop radio interview. Talk about a ‘tin ear’.

    So, you’re not happy unless Obama takes your word over what he actually knows, and goes into mourning to allow Romney free run of the airwaves?

    Obama has crises, but he’s not stupid. Obama deals with stuff, and carries on.

    The the assault on the consulate complex was planned and carried out with precision due to obvious insider intelligence. This ‘act of war’ was not the result of a silly movie that had been released months ago…as Sectary of State Clinton misleadingly said it was intially. Talk about an appointment who is out of her depth and flailing…

    Okay, I’ll talk about how you’re way out of your depth, and flailing. Discretion suggests we would withhold judgment on how the Benghazi compound was overrun. Where you get the information that there was “insider intelligence” would be briefly entertaining, but not informative. Clinton’s information, revised by new intelligence, doesn’t excuse Romney’s defense of the horrid movie. (Can you imagine what he’d say were it the LDS faith attacked with false claims against Joseph Smith and Brigham Young, instead of Islam?)

    Is much of the Islamic world still ticked off that the U.S. invaded Afghanistan and Iraq? Yes. That wasn’t Obama’s doing, however. Are al Quaeda sympathizers really ticked off that since Obama became commander in chief, the campaign against al Quaeda has been much more successful? No doubt. I don’t think that justifies any leap from loyalty to America as Romney appeared to make, or you appear to be making. It’s a crisis for all Americans. Spreading disinformation is not helping matters.

    In any case, claims that Obama “sympathized” with the attackers are scurrilous (traitorous, too, but why gild the lily). Claims that Obama didn’t do what he should have done are completely groundless. If you’re going to run your life claiming that anything Obama does is wrong, you’re going to get into trouble when he salutes, the flag, saves America, and warns against eating yellow snow.

    “There is growing belief that the attack was in revenge for the killing in a drone strike in Pakistan of Mohammed Hassan Qaed, an al-Qa’ida operative who was, as his nom-de-guerre Abu Yahya al-Libi suggests, from Libya, and timed for the anniversary of the 11 September attacks.”

    Help me out here: Are you going to argue that Obama sympathizes with the attackers, or claim that he’s too tough on them? Don’t try to argue both at the same time, though — it confuses readers and makes you look wishy-washy and foolish.

    So Remember how Kaddafi kept saying that the rebels were al Qaeda types, and that if he went down they would come to power? Well, al Qaeda may not be formally in power in Libya, but we can be sure that if Kaddafi were still alive, al Qaeda would not have been in a position to launch this deadly attack on a U.S. consulate.

    Okay, so you’re not going to defend democracy, you don’t give a hang about Libyans, peace in the Middle East isn’t something you’d like to see, and you’ll even go so far as supporting Gadhaffi in your sheer hatred of Obama?

    Yeah, we see what you’re doing.

    The reality is that Gadhaffi did not wipe out the entire population of Benghazi as he had pledged to do, because Obama’s solution and actions stopped him. Obama prevented a great genocide. It’s sadly ironic that Benghazi then became a site for the killing of a U.S. diplomat of the high caliber of Chris Stevens, who worked tirelessly to free Libya. Those are realities in the world today. It’s no reason for us to pull support from the Libyan people, from the Libyan government, from Democracy, or from our engagement in the world to promote justice, democracy and peace.

    Like

  5. David.Xavier says:

    You do know that Obama just did Vegas after an American ambassador was dragged through the streets. ( Ok, the dead ambassador, was being taken to hospital , but stopped for some cell phone pictures) Then Obama did Letterman…and a hip hop radio interview. Talk about a ‘tin ear’. The the assault on the consulate complex was planned and carried out with precision due to obvious insider intelligence. This ‘act of war’ was not the result of a silly movie that had been released months ago…as Sectary of State Clinton misleadingly said it was intially. Talk about an appointment who is out of her depth and flailing…

    “There is growing belief that the attack was in revenge for the killing in a drone strike in Pakistan of Mohammed Hassan Qaed, an al-Qa’ida operative who was, as his nom-de-guerre Abu Yahya al-Libi suggests, from Libya, and timed for the anniversary of the 11 September attacks.”

    So Remember how Kaddafi kept saying that the rebels were al Qaeda types, and that if he went down they would come to power? Well, al Qaeda may not be formally in power in Libya, but we can be sure that if Kaddafi were still alive, al Qaeda would not have been in a position to launch this deadly attack on a U.S. consulate.

    Like

  6. JamesK says:

    David asks: self censure and criticism of Islam to stop attacks on Americans? What say you!

    If the criticism is honest and not racist then go ahead. But if your side is constantly going to engage in nothing short of sociopathic lying about Islam and Muslims and treat them more or less like how Hitler treated the Jews then you should probably shut up as you and yours are harming the national security of the United States.

    Like

  7. Ed Darrell says:

    So are Obama’s initial responses worthy of criticism? Should we self censure and criticism of Islam to stop attacks on Americans? What say you!

    With all the timelines around on the internet, in the newspapers, on television, how can you get this stuff so wrong?

    Obama’s reaction was appropriately calm. Should the religious idiots in the U.S. use their heads? Yes. Should the U.S. defend its diplomats? Three former SEALs died doing that. The attack in Benghazi was not just a mob — it started out with a well-coordinated, massive grenade attack which overwhelmed the Libyan defense forces. Libya has apologized.

    I’ve tried to figure out what Romney’s position is on Libya. He seems to blow with the wind, usually simply opposing what Obama says or does. Obama said “don’t eat yellow snow,” and Romney put out a list of ten benefits of eating yellow snow.

    Specifically, as best I’ve figured:

    1. Romney was cautious about Libya at first, since Gaddhafi had become a “friend.”
    2. Romney then cautiously supported aid to Libyan rebels against Gaddhafi;
    3. Until Obama pulled out the brilliant strategy to save Benghazi, at which point Romney was against aid.
    4. When the actions to save 200,000 people in Benghazi from genocide worked, Romney complained about the cost and the lack of a declaration of war.
    5. When the rebels succeeded, Romney warned that they were “too Islamic.” He complained Obama was not involved deeply enough, and that things got out of control with the death of Gaddhafi.
    6. When they set up a government successfully, Romney continued his claim that foreign aid should be cut off.
    7. When the riots started, Romney defended the awful film (Roger Ebert is an Obama supporter, but surely there is someone with enough taste in movies in Mormondom that he could have been warned off, isn’t there?)
    8. When the American Embassy in Cairo said our government does not condone the film, Romney called Obama a chicken.
    9. When news came out that our Ambassador to Libya had been murdered, Romney said the whole affair was the result of Obama’s indecision and “apologies.” Remember, Obama’s the one who, on the advice of people like our late Ambassador, devised the strategy to save Benghazi, got France, England and the rest of NATO on board, then executed the strategy to the liberation of Libya. Who was defending democracy better?

    I gotta go recruit Scouts. Maybe you can read up on these incidents in the interim, get your facts right.

    Like

  8. David.Xavier says:

    Romney’s initial criticism was of the Obama administration’s reflex comments after the initial embassy raid which condemned the film maker who has made a documentary critical of Mohammed.

    This seems a legitimate area of criticism from Romney , after all Bush was never ever spared- and his as a legal war.

    After the invasion of the embassy in Egypt and the desecration of our flag by a mob of Islamic militants here was the Obama administration’s first response:

    “The Embassy of the United States in Cairo condemns the continuing efforts by misguided individuals to hurt the religious feelings of Muslims—as we condemn efforts to offend believers of all religions,”

    This was followed up by a clarification by Hillary Clinton:

    “The United States deplores any intentional effort to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. Our commitment to religious tolerance goes back to the very beginning of our nation. But let me be clear: There is never any justification for violent acts of this kind,”

    It does seem that these statement are worthy of criticism, regardless of one’s position on the overthrow of the governments of Egypt and Libya. It is never right to invade embassies and kill ambassadors, and that is the point one would expect the administration to make. The ire of the mob was over a film which the USA had no part in creating.

    But at least one definite and salient fact emerges—there was a battle in the consulate compound that went on for several hours. And evidently there was no armed Libyan government force that could or would come in and simply end it. For our government to describe this catastrophe as having been brought about by small group of malcontents having no connection to the Libyan powers-that-be is a transparent lie.

    Repeat: this former enemy, Qaddafi, made peace with us, and we accepted and celebrated this peace with a former enemy and we restored normal diplomatic relations with him and we even pursued friendly bilateral relations with him. And he never did anything to violate our new-found peaceful relations or to threaten us. And then we helped overthrow and kill him, and boasted of his death. As I said many times, the U.S. intervention in Libya was mad, lawless, criminal, self-damaging, and self-damning. It is impossible to have any sympathy for the U.S. in what has now happened in Libya.

    And please , I remember that the congressional Republicans and Mitt Romney did nothing to oppose America’s criminal intervention in Libya but supported it. Condoleezza Rice , who as Secretary of State had a cordial visit with Qaddafi in Tripoli, welcomed his overthrow and murder. Sen. McCain , who, along with several other senators, had a cordial visit with Qaddafi in Tripoli in 2009, two years later urged on his overthrow and boasted of his murder.

    The Russian get It- “Russia has long argued that the West should not support popular uprisings against dictatorships in the Middle East lest Islamic fundamentalism take hold. Vladimir V. Putin, then serving as prime minister, was especially enraged last fall after an angry crowd killed his ally, Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, an event he later condemned as a “repulsive, disgusting” scene.”

    But this is what ‘we’ wanted, and what ‘we’ want. We as a country support democracy, i.e. universal open elections, as the highest good, and therefore we support whatever democracy brings about. And, in Islamland, democracy automatically brings about Islamic rule, which means, among other things, the rule that anyone who insults Muhammad must die, and that if an individual in a foreign country insults Muhammad, it is as if that entire country and its government had insulted Muhammad.

    It leaves me no pleasure in saying that Hillary and the Obama administration are clearly a step further along the path to of appeasing Islam savagery, than the mass of conservatives, who, whatever other failings of logic they have vis-a-vis Islam, still support the rights of artists to produce work critical of others beliefs. The State Department , on the overhand deplores and condemns such art when it offends Muslim sensibility.

    So are Obama’s initial responses worthy of criticism? Should we self censure and criticism of Islam to stop attacks on Americans? What say you!

    Like

  9. JamesK says:

    And naturally the right wing, showing all the patriotism of Benedict Arnold, manages to spin this and the tragedy into an attack on the President…

    Like

Play nice in the Bathtub -- splash no soap in anyone's eyes.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,150 other followers

%d bloggers like this: